BEYOND ACCEPTANCE AND REJECTION? The Anti-Bon Polemic Included in the Thirteenth-Century "Single Intention (Dgong-gcig Yig-cha)" and Its Background in Tibetan Religious History

[...]the historical patterns that will be uncovered might lead us to challenge some long-held assumptions, particularly as they concern the Tibetan polemical tradition and its continuing hold on our consciousness.When dealing with a polemic all the usual problematics of scholarly objectivity and impartiality rise to the surface. The contents of this early thirteenth-century polemic have been known for a long time, at second hand, thanks to Sarat Chandra Dass 1881 translation3 of the 1801 polemic compiled by Thuu-bkwan Blo-bzangchos-kyi-nyi-ma and included in his Glass Mirror of Doctrinal Systems.4 A good English translation of the original Single Intention passage recently appeared in Namkhai Norbus book Drung, Deu & Bon, and I also translated it as a part of my dissertation.5 I do not intend to discuss very much the contents of this polemic, but rather to concentrate on what was behind it, historically speaking, and then in particular try to identify the proponent of the rather liberal views about Bon with which the Single Intention polemic begged to differ. The identity of the unnamed liberal was an issue I did not attempt to address in my dissertation, and I am presenting it for the first time in this paper.One warning in advance: According to the same source, these leftover statements were pressed down (mnan-pa) and made intoa supplement (lhan-thabs).10 There is some conflict in the sources about whether the supplement contains the round numbers of 50 or40 statements.